Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2010 19:02:00 +0100 From: Shaun Amott <shaun@FreeBSD.org> To: Matthew Seaman <m.seaman@infracaninophile.co.uk> Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: security/hydra and www/hydra Message-ID: <20100723180200.GB80046@charon.picobyte.net> In-Reply-To: <4C4802D2.9050108@infracaninophile.co.uk> References: <390621279717692@web26.yandex.ru> <86r5iwkciz.fsf@chateau.d.if> <4C472AB1.9070209@yandex.ru> <20100721202111.GE4468@home.opsec.eu> <20100721220509.GB23159@lonesome.com> <4C4802D2.9050108@infracaninophile.co.uk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 09:35:30AM +0100, Matthew Seaman wrote: > > On 21/07/2010 23:05, Mark Linimon wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 10:21:11PM +0200, Kurt Jaeger wrote: > >>> And is this ok to have two ports with the same name. > >> > >> No, it's bad and should be avoided. I'm pretty sure some > >> portupgrade tool will break. > > > > No, they actually handle it ok. It _is_ confusing to the users, however > > (and, if you go through a raw list of package binaries, You Just Have To > > Know which one's which.) > > Doesn't this cause problems for the CVS MODULES stuff? I thought that > was one of the biggest reasons for why port names should be unique. > It does, but it's easy enough to work around by fabricating a unique name where there would be a conflict (e.g. www_hydra, security_hydra). -- Shaun Amott // PGP: 0x6B387A9A "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds." - Ralph Waldo Emerson
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20100723180200.GB80046>